Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Gloria Castro-Castillo, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. City of New York, et al., Defendants-Respondents, Metropolitan Transit Authority, Defendant.
_
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold B. Beeler, J.), entered July 15, 2009, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to serve a notice of claim upon the proper party, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff was allegedly injured in a slip and fall on a slushy subway staircase. Although she served a timely notice of claim on the City and the MTA, she failed to serve such a notice upon the proper party, defendant New York City Transit Authority, which operates the subway system. It is well settled that service of the requisite notice of claim must be made upon the correct party (Williams v. City of New York, 74 AD3d 548 [2010] ), and a plaintiff may not avoid dismissal in that regard by invoking the savings provision of General Municipal Law § 50-e(3)(c) (Scantlebury v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 4 NY3d 606 [2005]; Diaz v. NYCHHC, 56 AD3d 317, lv denied 12 NY3d 712). The notice of claim that was served listed only the City and the MTA. Even though these papers were subsequently transmitted by those defendants to NYCTA for a hearing under General Municipal Law § 50-h, that cannot be considered appropriate service (see Cottiers v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 303 A.D.2d 187 [2003] ).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
_
CLERK
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 3521
Decided: November 04, 2010
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)